Re: fuzzy subnet aggregation

[Nick Morrison via NANOG <nanog () nanog org>]

> On 27. Oct 2019, at 20:36, Joe Maimon <jmaimon () jmaimon com> wrote:
>
> Not quite.
>
> 203.0.113.1
> 203.0.113.3
> 203.0.113.5
> 203.0.112.6
> 203.0.112.7
>
> Will aggregate to 203.0.113.0/29 if you dont mind the missing 3 addresses
> in the unaggregated list.
>
> Hence, fuzzy aggregation.

Could you describe the problem again? I’m interested, but I’m not sure that I quite understand what you want to do :-) 
were the last two addresses supposed to have 112 in the third octet?

Nick